I don’t have a problem with Gupta’s qualifications. But I do remember his mugging of Michael Moore over Sicko. You don’t have to like Moore or his film; but Gupta specifically claimed that Moore “fudged his facts”, when the truth was that on every one of the allegedly fudged facts, Moore was actually right and CNN was wrong.
What bothered me about the incident was that it was what Digby would call Village behavior: Moore is an outsider, he’s uncouth, so he gets smeared as unreliable even though he actually got it right. It’s sort of a minor-league version of the way people who pointed out in real time that Bush was misleading us into war are to this day considered less “serious” than people who waited until it was fashionable to reach that conclusion. And appointing Gupta now, although it’s a small thing, is just another example of the lack of accountability that always seems to be the rule when you get things wrong in a socially acceptable way.
Tom Geoghegan, labor lawyer and author of quite a few fantastic books about democracy and economic justice, has announced his candidacy for Congress on DailyKos. He’s running in the special election to replace Rahm Emmanuel in Illinois’s 5th congressional district. His campaign website is here, and you can donate money via ActBlue.
Progressives couldn’t ask for a better candidate or opportunity. Certainly I’ll be sending him money and doing whatever else I can for his campaign. I strongly urge you to do the same.
As Bush slinks out of the White House, I imagine we’ll be seeing a lot more stories like this:
LAHORE, Pakistan — When Muhammad Saad Iqbal arrived home here in August after more than six years in American custody, including five at the military prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, he had difficulty walking, his left ear was severely infected, and he was dependent on a cocktail of antibiotics and antidepressants.
Mr. Iqbal was never convicted of any crime, or even charged with one. He was quietly released from Guantánamo with a routine explanation that he was no longer considered an enemy combatant, part of an effort by the Bush administration to reduce the prison’s population.
But no big deal. Remember, it’s all a great big effing joke.
Israel’s stated goal for its military operation is to halt the rocket fire from Gaza and to create a new security equation in southern Israel, where three civilians and a soldier have been killed in rocket attacks in the last six days.
It has not declared its intention of toppling Hamas…
Tuesday in Slate, which is owned by the Washington Post:
Asked if Israel was out to topple Gaza’s Hamas rulers, [Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni] said, “Not now.” If reinstating the status quo ante is the test of proportionality, then Israel passes with flying colors. All it wants to do—as Prime Minister Ehud Olmert explained—is “to improve the security reality of southern residents in a thorough manner.” A modest goal…Olmert never promised Israelis that he would dismantle Hamas’ rule in Gaza.
The Times of London, quoting something said on Monday—ie, well before either of the above articles were published:
“The goal of the operation is to topple Hamas,” Haim Ramon, the deputy to Ehud Olmert, the Prime Minister, said.
It was the first time since it launched its blistering offensive that Israel has openly stated that regime change is its ultimate goal. “We will stop firing immediately if someone takes the responsibility of this government, anyone but Hamas,” Mr Ramon said.
A potential crisis in the Social Security system is a long way off. Why, then, would a new President spend political capital on yet another tax hike when he will almost certainly seek to undo the Bush tax cuts for more immediate demands, like universal health care? When I asked Obama about this, he smiled and leaned forward, as if eager to explain that my premise was precisely the politically calibrated approach that he wanted to challenge. “What I think you’re asserting is that it makes sense for us to continue hiding the ball,” Obama said, “and not tell the American people the truth—”
I interrupted: “Politically it makes sense—”
He finished the sentence: “—to not tell people what we really think?”
Over the years since I first saw Obama speak I met him about half a dozen times, often at Palestinian and Arab-American community events in Chicago including a May 1998 community fundraiser at which Edward Said was the keynote speaker….
The last time I spoke to Obama was in the winter of 2004 at a gathering in Chicago’s Hyde Park neighborhood. He was in the midst of a primary campaign to secure the Democratic nomination for the United States Senate seat he now occupies. But at that time polls showed him trailing.
As he came in from the cold and took off his coat, I went up to greet him. He responded warmly, and volunteered, “Hey, I’m sorry I haven’t said more about Palestine right now, but we are in a tough primary race. I’m hoping when things calm down I can be more up front.” He referred to my activism, including columns I was contributing to the The Chicago Tribune critical of Israeli and US policy, “Keep up the good work!”
How completely predictable that Obama is eager to say what he “really thinks” when (1) what he “really thinks” is inaccurate and (2) it serves political power, but is not eager to do so when (3) what he “really thinks” is accurate and (4) it requires confronting political power. (Of course, god only knows what Obama truly believes about Israel/Palestine at this point.)
Watching Olbermann’s rundown of the past year, all I can think is: thank god that’s over with.
Which is what a lot of people told me they felt reading my Year in Review cartoons (here and here). (And as incomplete as they are, note that I managed to squeeze in sixteen panels apiece, rather than the twelve-panel format I’ve used in previous years. It was that kind of year.)
Not that I’ve had a whole lot of time for the blog this past month, but you can expect even less over the next week or so. In the meantime, don’t forget that beloved holiday classic, A Very Sparky Christmas.
And despite all the problems of the day, remember: the Bush administration will soon be history. And that alone is cause to rejoice.
Finally, experts suggest that publishers missed crucial opportunities to cope with digital books, Internet innovations and economic pressures. “The big houses proved incapable of looking at the future. I’ve always been struck at how relatively un-nimble the big houses are,” says Tom Engelhardt, a consulting editor at Metropolitan books and the author of the prophetic novel “The Last Days of Publishing.” He recently wrote an essay about the crisis at his Web site, TomDispatch.com, and says he predicted the crash for years — but no one would listen.
This is in line with my own anecdotal experience in publishing. For the most part, the publishers I’ve dealt with seem only to have recently become aware of the demise of the quill pen, let alone the advent of the internet. Personally, I’ve had enough of it — I was already considering leaving the burning house before I even realized it was on fire. I’m not going to stop publishing books, but I am going to pursue a less traditional model. More on that some other time.
Here’s the thing about the publishing industry: the job of any given person at a publishing house is not actually to try to sell books. It is to appear as though they are trying to sell books. It is a small distinction, but a crucial one.
Carol Chomsky, wife of Noam and herself a noted linguist, has died at their home in Massachusetts at 78. According to a New Yorker profile of Chomsky, they first met when she was three and he was five; they had been married for 59 years.
